Passionate about IP! Since June 2003 the IPKat has covered copyright, patent, trade mark, info-tech, privacy and confidentiality issues from a mainly UK and European perspective. The team is Neil J. Wilkof, Annsley Merelle Ward, Nicola Searle, Eleonora Rosati, and Merpel, with contributions from Mark Schweizer. Read, post comments and participate! E-mail the Kats here

The team is joined by Guest Kats Rosie Burbidge, Stephen Jones, Mathilde Pavis, and Eibhlin Vardy, and by InternKats Verónica Rodríguez Arguijo, Hayleigh Bosher, Tian Lu and Cecilia Sbrolli.

Tuesday, 17 November 2015

From Katfriend and occasional contributor Emma Perot comes news of a topic that leaps into the limelight for a short while and then vanishes for an age: the legal protection of TV show formats. This time it's a Dutch dispute. Emma explains:

Talpa Media, the Dutch producers of the popular television
show 'The Voice' have been accused by Irishman Roy Barry of stealing his idea
for the format of the show. The claim brought in California has been dismissed on
the basis of lack of jurisdiction.
Barry, not one to be silenced, has been fighting an uphill battle since 2013 and
says he will be pursuing the claim in the Netherlands, where Talpa Media is
based.

Barry says he came up with the idea for a musical
talent show where judges would not be able to see the contestants. Readers
familiar with ‘The Voice’ will be aware that judges sit in large red chairs
facing the audience and do not see the contestant unless they press a button,
indicating their preference. Pressing this button causes the chair to swivel
towards the stage, allowing the judges to see their chosen contestant.

Barry filed his idea with The TV Writers’ Vault in the USA,
a website where writers post their ideas, allowing them to be viewed by TV
executives. He alleges that an employee of The Entertainment Group which
was subsequently acquired by Talpa Media, viewed his proposal on The TV
Writers’ Vault. His claims his idea was then used by Talpa to create ‘The Voice’
of Holland and other instalments of the franchise. He sued for infringement
of copyright as well as breach of contract.

Copyright Law

To bring an action for copyright infringement in the
Netherlands, Barry would have to establish jurisdiction and applicable law.
According to Art. 7(2) of the Brussels Regulation Recast, the claim can be
tried in the place where the harmful event occurred. This should allow him to
proceed in the Netherlands if the Dutch production company made the show there,
as appears to be the case. As to the law, Article 8 of the Rome II Regulation states
that the law of the country for which protection is claimed will be applicable.

In the Netherlands, the Dutch Supreme Court, in Castaway Television Productions v Endemol
Entertainment (unreported, 2004), confirmed that TV
formats can attract copyright protection. In that case, the producers of
Survive! alleged copyright infringement by the producers of the infamous Big
Brother. The Supreme Court found that Survive! was subject to copyright
protection as the format consisted of 12 identifiable elements which were
present in production as well as the format bible. However, the claimant ultimately failed due to a lack of substantial similarity between the two
shows.

Barry’s position is different in that he is claiming
infringement of his pitch rather than of an actual show, as was the case in Castaway Television. The likelihood of
success would largely depend on how detailed the pitch was. Said the court:

“If only one element has been copied, the situation is also clear: in that
case no infringement is involved.”

If Barry’s idea was simply an outline for a
show where judges could not see the contestants, he will not succeed. The court
will undertake an assessment of the elements of both works to determine the
level of similarity. Considering that ‘The Voice’ would have gone through many
stages of development before production, it is unlikely that there would be
substantial similarity between the two concepts.

Contract Law

In addition to copyright infringement, Barry alleges breach
of contract as the person who saw his idea on The TV Writers’ Vault agreed to a non-disclosure agreement (NDA). It seems that this NDA was provided by The TV Writer’s Vault as there is
no indication that Barry had any personal dealings with The Entertainment
Group. The TV Writer’s Vault website states that network executives who use
their site agree to the “Confidentiality/Terms of Service” policy. This policy
provides that site users will be given access to “proprietary and confidential
information that belongs solely to the Writer” and that users “will not
disclose, utilize or otherwise exploit any of the Confidential Information in
any way.”

Assuming that Barry established jurisdiction under Art.7(1)
of the Brussels Convention Recast which deals with contract situations, Dutch
law is likely to apply to the interpretation of the terms of service according
to the Rome I Regulation. Dutch law recognises Terms and Conditions as a valid,
binding contract once offer and acceptance has been completed and the terms are
reasonable and fair. The Entertainment Group’s employee
would have accepted The TV Writers’ Vault Service Policy before gaining access to
the information and would have been aware of the confidentiality requirement.
Barry’s success will depend on whether ‘The Voice’ actually utilised his
confidential information.

In a similar UK case, Wade v British Sky Broadcasting Ltd [2014] EWHC 634 [noted by the IPKat here], Brian Wade and Geraldine Perry brought a claim against Sky for
breach of confidence. Wade and Perry alleged that after pitch meetings and email
exchanges over a period of months, including the presentation of a deck of
materials, Sky eventually informed them that they were not moving forward with
the pitch. Sky later produced Must be the Music, a show which Wade and Perry
believed to have copied many elements of their confidential pitch. Mr Justice
Birss found that the information was indeed confidential but ruled in favour of
Sky as he did not find any misuse of the confidential information. Barry is in
a precarious position compared to Wade and Perry who had meet with Sky
producers several times. Barry’s claim is based solely on his pitch which was
stored on The TV Writer’s Vault as he had no interaction with The Entertainment
Group or Tapla.

TV format industry

The Netherlands is one of the few
jurisdictions, along with Brazil, which has explicitly stated that TV formats
can attract copyright protection. In the UK, someone seeking to protect a TV
format is more likely to be successful pursuing a breach of confidence action
and should ensure that NDAs are used in the negotiation process. Even so,
when confidential information is disclosed, the process of producing a show
which requires many changes throughout stages of development can result in a
finding of no misuse of confidential information.

Despite no explicit copyright protection for TV formats in
the UK and the limited success of breach of confidence actions, the 2014 UK Television Exports Survey reported that TV format export business was worth £1.28bn.
The absence of intellectual property rights has clearly not hindered trade in
this area. With limited legal rights, why do companies invest significant
amounts of money obtain franchise agreements for TV shows? Why not just copy
the format? According to Bowrey (which takes a similar legal approach to the UK), acquiring
franchise rights not only reduces the risk of litigation (lack of protection
doesn’t stop people from trying) but also allows access to production expertise.

Being able to speak to producers of a successful format
provides insider knowledge on what works well, what causes difficulties, how
audiences react to certain changes and most valuably, the actual production
process. It’s much easier to have guidance in the form of experienced producers
than having to figure out how to achieve the same success with knowledge just
based on what is seen on TV. Also, the format may not be entitled to IP
protection, but successful shows have valuable trade marks which can be used
when a franchise licence is obtained. People in different countries will
usually be aware of the trade mark due to international broadcasting, and are
more likely to take an interest in a local franchise of an already successful
show.

IPKat Policies

This page summarises the IPKat policies on guest submissions and comments. If you have posted a comment to one of our blogposts and it hasn't appeared, it may be because it doesn't match our criteria for moderation. To learn more about our guest submissions, comments and complaints policy and the procedure for lodging a complaint click here.

Has the Kat got your tongue?

Just click the magic box below and get this page translated into a bewildering selection of languages!